MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analysis of Hypothyroidism Development in Post-Radiotherapy Nasopharyngeal Cancer Patients using Survival Trees

2021· article· en· W3118355520 on OpenAlexaff
Sarini Abdullah, Andhika Rachman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersDirektorat Riset and Pengembangan, Universitas IndonesiaUniversitas Indonesia
KeywordsRadiation therapyMedicineSubgroup analysisThyroidNasopharyngeal cancerOncologyHazard ratioInternal medicineHormoneThyroid cancerNasopharyngeal carcinoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Radiotherapy is one of the treatments for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC). However, this treatment might produce an unfavorable effect on the thyroid gland, which eventually results in less production of thyroid hormone. This is condition is known as hypothyroidism. The development of hypothyroidism in each patient with post-radiative NPC differs according to several factors. This study aims to analyze the rate of development of hypothyroidism in post-radiated NPC patients. This aim is achieved by identifying subgroups of patients with different hazard rates of developing hypothyroidism, and further identify factors explaining hypothyroidism in each subgroup. Data on ninety-seven NPC post-radiation patients taken from one of the hospitals in Jakarta were analyzed. Survival tree with the relative risk tree algorithm was proposed to analyze the data. We identified three subgroups of patients with relatively slow, medium, and fast developing of hypothyroidism. For the slow subgroup, 26% of the patients developed hypothyroidism at 150+ weeks post-radiation, while it only took less than 30 weeks for those in fast-growing subgroup; and 70 until 130 weeks for the medium subgroup. We also found that sweat production and Zulewski’s total score were the important factors in explaining the development rate of hypothyroidism.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicTraditional Chinese Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207